[EM] Question on RCV/IRV multi-seat method used in Minneapolis

[Kathy Dopp]

Hi Jonathan,

I know that IRV is nonmonotonic in cases of single winner elections,
but what I am asking is have any examples been provided of IRV's
non-monotonicity in cases where there are multi-seat elections where
excess votes above a threshold number to win a seat are transferred
above the established "threshold" level?  And the transferred excess
votes are transferred to voters' second choice candidates and weighted
according to the proportional amount of second choices for each
candidate in the excess votes above the threshold?

I.e.  Do the URLs you provided show examples of the non-monotonicity
of multi-winner IRV elections counted using the above methods of
transferring excess votes using mathematical formulae to transfer
correct proportions of excess votes?

Thanks.

Kathy

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Jonathan Lundell <jlundell at pobox.com> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2008, at 9:04 AM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the info. Jonathan.
>>
>> Do you or does anyone know if this muti-seat IRV method that splits
>> votes of voters to their second choice candidates after some winning
>> candidates receive the threshold amount of votes, exhibits
>> non-monotonicity or not like the normal IRV method does?  If so, is
>> there an example posted somewhere?
>
> STV is not monotonic.
>
> There's a lot of literature on the subject.
>
> http://www.cs.duke.edu/courses/fall06/cps296.2/stv_hard.pdf
> http://www.math.nus.edu.sg/aslaksen/voting.html
> <http://www.votingmatters.org.uk/> has a lot of material on STV.
>
> Terry Bouricius posted a pretty reasonable defense of IRV's
> non-monotonicity: http://fairvote.org/monotonicity/
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Kathy
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Jonathan Lundell <jlundell at pobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 22, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anyone know of another election scheme that allows for the split
>>>> of a vote into fractions?  Do other jurisdictions with IRV use
>>>> fractions to transfer surplus votes over a threshold amount, other
>>>> than Minneapolis?
>>>
>>> Scotland, among others.
>>>
>>> Though we typically don't call multi-seat STV "IRV".
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Kathy Dopp
>>
>> The material expressed herein is the informed product of the author
>> Kathy Dopp's fact-finding and investigative efforts. Dopp is a
>> Mathematician, Expert in election audit mathematics and procedures; in
>> exit poll discrepancy analysis; and can be reached at
>>
>> P.O. Box 680192
>> Park City, UT 84068
>> phone 435-658-4657
>>
>> http://utahcountvotes.org
>> http://electionmathematics.org
>> http://electionarchive.org
>>
>> How to Audit Election Outcome Accuracy
>>
>> http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/VoteCountAuditBillRequest.pdf
>>
>> History of Confidence Election Auditing Development & Overview of
>> Election Auditing Fundamentals
>>
>> http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/History-of-Election-Auditing-Development.pdf
>>
>> Voters Have Reason to Worry
>> http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf
>
>
>



-- 

Kathy Dopp

The material expressed herein is the informed product of the author
Kathy Dopp's fact-finding and investigative efforts. Dopp is a
Mathematician, Expert in election audit mathematics and procedures; in
exit poll discrepancy analysis; and can be reached at

P.O. Box 680192
Park City, UT 84068
phone 435-658-4657

http://utahcountvotes.org
http://electionmathematics.org
http://electionarchive.org

How to Audit Election Outcome Accuracy
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/VoteCountAuditBillRequest.pdf

History of Confidence Election Auditing Development & Overview of
Election Auditing Fundamentals
http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/History-of-Election-Auditing-Development.pdf

Voters Have Reason to Worry
http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf